↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Gout mimicking spondyloarthritis: case report and literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Gout mimicking spondyloarthritis: case report and literature review
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, June 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s133572
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wenji Chen, Yanyan Wang, Yan Li, Zheng Zhao, Lixia Feng, Jian Zhu, Jianglin Zhang, Feng Huang

Abstract

Gout is clinically characterized by episodes of monoarthritis, which not only typically affects the peripheral joints but also occasionally affect the axial joint, such as the sacroiliac joint (SIJ), and often mimics spondyloarthritis (SpA). Two cases of gout mimicking SpA are presented in the current paper. One patient was a 32-year-old man with a history of asymmetrical oligoarthritis of ankle and metatarsophalangeal joints (MTPJ). He had left gluteal pain for 2 weeks. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed the bone erosion of the left SIJ. T1-weighted MRI showed hypointense T1 and hyperintense T2 signals of the left SIJ. The other patient was a 24-year-old man with left back pain and hip pain for 4 months and intermittent fever for 3 months. He had a history of gout for 3 years. Both patients underwent CT-guided sacroiliac biopsy, and monosodium urate (MSU) crystals were shown by polarized microscopy. Gout can often mimic SpA and seldomly affects the SIJ. Thus, its correct diagnosis and adequate therapy can halt the development of such damaging complications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Other 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 15%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,220,514
of 25,840,929 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,043
of 2,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,562
of 331,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#43
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,840,929 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,013 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,712 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.